The Real ID Card

Have you heard of the Real ID card proposed in the Real ID Act? The act was actually passed in 2005 and is now receiving lots of attention. What I don't understand is why anyone would oppose a law that would require all Americans to have a national ID card. As the Secretary of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff put it, the only people that will be disappointed by this new ID card will be terrorists, illegal immigrants, and con-men.

There are a few people not in agreement with this plan that I would like to point out. First is Barry Steinhardt, an ACLU attorney who said,

What the Department of Homeland Security has done is to kick the can down the road to the next administration, and probably not just to the next administration, but conceivably two to three administrations from now.

In my opinion it is Mr. Steinhardt that should be kicked - right out of the country, which he obviously hates. Why is it so difficult to understand that after 9/11 we live in a different world and it will never - never the the way it was before. Maybe we were living in a fantasy of false security before 9/11, but now we have been awakened and we may never sleep soundly again. Is the requirement of a national ID card such a burden to pay to be a little bit more secure? Who exactly is it that Mr. Steinhardt is fighting for in his opposition to the Real ID Act?

Next is Senator Patrick Leahy, an elected public servant. He believes the Real ID Act should be repealed in favor of a more flexible and mutually beneficial approach. Mutually beneficial to who? Illegal aliens? How can a US Senator not be in favor of a law that requires all US citizens to be able to identify themselves? Could it be because he wants illegal aliens to be able to vote and keep the social program and income redistribution masters (the Democrats) in power?

Another attorney for the ACLU, Tim Sparapani, said that since the states would be required to set up their own security policies, that everyone would be at risk. He says that one weak State would put everyone's private information in jeapordy of being stolen. Hey Timmy, the increased security of the Real ID would far out weigh your weak data privacy argument.

On the topic of cost, the estimates range from a high of $23 billion to a low of $3.9 billion. Really, $3.9 billion? Okay, there are roughly 300 million Americans, so a database that would create and maintain say double that number, 600 million, is just not that hard of a nut to crack. I realize that there would be several thousand users of this system and that each state would need access in all of the drivers license offices. Also, there would be several government agencies that would need access for analysis and spying. I think that I could ask the government for half of the $3.9 billion, start a company, supply the Real ID solution, and that a tinnie-weenie profit for myself.

The bottom line is that we keep finding all these lame reasons for not protecting our country. If we don't secure our nation, there will soon be nothing left to secure.

##That's my opinion##

Where Did Our Border Fence Go?

If you have the stomach for it, I invite you all to read (or at least take a look at) the

Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2008.

This legislation is over 3,000 pages in length, but fear not, I'm sure that all of our respective elected Senators and House members read it thoroughly before they voted on it. Oh, and if you're wondering who did vote for it, please check out the Roll Call Votes for H.R. 2764.

This piece of legislation does considerable damage to the Secure Fence Act of 2006 which was enacted into law to build a two tier border fence along our southern border. The model for this fence is in place in southern California and has reduced local crime rates by 50%.

The new law reduces funding to the border fence while giving money for lawyers to represent illegal aliens. What? Am I living in the twilight zone? So I guess the game in Washington is if a law is passed that you don't like, you simply stall long enough to pass counteractive legislation to get your way. I thought I read somewhere that we were a nation of laws - huh, guess that was some other country.

It's time we held our representatives and our government accountable. They have sworn an oath to protect the United States and it's citizens from invasion - read the Constitution, it's in there.

Our country is flooding. We need to shut off the water before we start to bail or try to repair the plumbing. Build the fence, close the border, and then we can deal with the illegals that are still here. Everyone knows that it's the correct course of action - so what are we waiting on?

##That's my opinion##

Illegal Alien or Undocumented Immigrant?

I recently sent this reply to Joanne Ostrow of the Denver Post in response to her article aimed at Bill O'Reilly:

Ms. Ostrow, we live in a Republic even though most of the country, when asked, would respond that we live in a Democracy. The difference being that a Republic is governed by the rule of law, while a Democracy is majority rule. Our founders specifically called out the dangers of Democracy and deliberately constructed a Republic.

If we choose to ignore the rule of law the United States would slip into anarchy and cease to be the country we know today. That being said, the term undocumented immigrant has no place and no meaning in our system of government. There are immigrants and there are illegal aliens. These two terms are specific and correct and should not be confused with each other. We continue to need immigrants to infuse our country with diversity and new ideas, while the rule of law must be maintained to protect the essence of who we are and the Republic our founders envisioned.

Illegal aliens are simply that, illegal. If you do not like the laws of this country, there are mechanisms in place to change the law. However, you can not simply ignore the laws that you disagree with and pursue your own set of rules. I don't like to pay taxes and believe that the 16th Amendment should be repealed. That does not mean that until that happens I can simply not pay my taxes - there are dire consequences - just as there should be for illegal aliens.

If you would prefer to live in anarchy, there are plenty of countries to choose from, but I prefer to live in the Republic to which I pledge my allegiance.

## That's my opinion ##